Jones v. State

• Citation: 97 Miss. 269,52 So. 791
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Decision Date: 20 June 1910
• Parties: CHARLES JONES v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

52 So. 791

97 Miss. 269

CHARLES JONES v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

Supreme Court of Mississippi

June 20, 1910

March 1910

FROM the circuit court of Bolivar county, HON. JAMES M. CASHIN Judge.

Jones appellant, was indicted and tried for and convicted of murder, and appealed to the supreme court. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.

Reversed and remanded.

Henry, Fox & Canizaro, and Alexander Y. Scott, for appellant.

Earl Brewer and George Butler, assistant attorney-general, for appellee.

[The reporter was unable to find the briefs of counsel in this case, hence synopses of them are not given.]

Argued orally by P. Henry and A. Y. Scott, for appellant, and by George Butler, assistant attorney-general, for appellee.

ANDERSON, J. SMITH, J. dissents.

OPINION

ANDERSON, J.

The appellant was tried and convicted of murder, and sentenced to the penitentiary for life. His defense was insanity. On that question much testimony was introduced, both on the part of defendant and of the state. At the conclusion of the testimony the court was moved by the state to exclude all the evidence of insanity which had been offered by the defendant, which motion the court sustained, leaving in the testimony offered on behalf of the state to show insanity, part of which was the fact that he had killed three other men before killing the deceased. This action of the court is assigned as error. Taking the testimony for all it proves and tends to prove, there was not sufficient evidence to go to the jury on the question of insanity. It did not tend to show insanity, but, on the contrary, that appellant's state of mind at the time of the killing was caused by anger. Had the court, therefore, excluded all the evidence of insanity offered for both the state and the appellant, there would have been no error in that respect. Failing to do this, there was left before the jury the fact that defendant had killed three other men before killing the deceased. It is hard to conceive a more damaging error. This testimony, ordinarily, would have been clearly incompetent, and was admitted here on the issue of insanity alone, and was permitted to remain before the jury, when the only reason for its admission had ceased to exist.

Another error assigned is that the court refused to grant the appellant a new trial because of the prejudice and bias of the juror T. B. Johnson. On his voir dire examination the court held, and properly so, that Johnson was a competent juror. However, on the motion for a new trial, testimony was introduced to show his incompetency, as follows (it will be borne in mind that there had been a previous trial of this case):

"J R. Henderson, white, testified on motion for new trial: That he was in the general mercantile business at Shelby, and knew T. B. Johnson; that he had known him for five or six years, and that Johnson had worked for him, and was in his employ 'last May just subsequent to that time;' that he had heard Johnson express an opinion in regard to Charlie Jones' case 'very often, ' and 'it was commented on a good many times;' and that Johnson said 'it would be hard for him to get out of the case without a conviction, owing to his former way; he had known him a long time, and his former record connected with this case, as he had heard it talked about, he would think he ought to be convicted.' Witness said that Johnson said he had known him [Charlie Jones] 'quite well since he was a young man, and was familiar with his past record;' that he (Johnson) connected Jones' past record with this case, and said, 'On both together it will be hard for him to get out of this case; his record was so bad before that.' These conversations with Johnson were had after the 15th day of May. On cross-examination, Mr. Henderson said that they were simply discussing the Jones case after it had been tried (meaning the first trial), and that, taking his past record, he was surprised he wasn't convicted. He further stated that Johnson was a man of splendid integrity and veracity. He said that Johnson's statements were made in his store; doesn't remember any one being present, except on one occasion a negro.

"L. W. Gordon, white, on motion for a new trial, testified that he lived at Shelby, and that his occupation was a plantation manager; that he knew T. B. Johnson 'last May, ' and had known him about four years; that the last trial of Charlie Jones was in May; that he had a conversation with Johnson relative to the trial. Q. State what it was, Mr. Gordon. A. Right after the trial, along about that time, there was a discussion over the trial and everything, and Mr. Johnson made a remark that they ought never to have turned him loose; that if he had been one of the jurors he never would have turned him loose; in other words, that he would have hung him. That is the words Johnson used in my presence in front of McKee & Henderson's store. Q. That was after the first trial? A. That was after the trial in the spring before this trial. On cross-examination, he said he couldn't say who was present; he doesn't think any one was; 'but I have heard him repeatedly, several times, make the same assertion.' Q. And he said, if he had been on the jury, he would have convicted him? A. Yes, sir. He said he had also known Mr. Johnson about four years, and that he was a man of honor and veracity.

"J. C. Lauderdale, white, testified on motion for new trial: Stated that he had lived at Shelby, knew T. B. Johnson, and had a conversation with him after the first trial of Jones. Q. Did you have any discussions about the case? A. Yes, sir; we talked about it several times. Q. State, Mr. Lauderdale, what Johnson said to you with regard to the case. A. He just stated he ought to have been convicted. He didn't see how the jury ever made a mistrial of it; that he thought he ought to have been convicted on general principles, as well as anything else. Q. Did you have more than one conversation with him? A. We talked about it several times; yes, sir. It was generally talked there. Q. That was his expression to you on several occasions? A. Yes, sir. On cross-examination witness said that they were simply discussing the Jones case, and Johnson told him what he had heard of it, and from what he had heard he would convict him; that he had known Johnson about twenty-five years, and had known him to be an honorable man of unquestioned veracity.

"Andrew Agnew, white, testified on motion for new trial, that he was one of the jurors on the first trial, and that he knew T. B. Johnson; that he had a conversation with T. B. Johnson after the first trial of this case. He says: When I passed the store, he (Johnson) asked me how it came off, and I told him they couldn't agree, and he said, 'Why, he ought to have been convicted on his past record.' Q. He knew you were a juror in the case? A. Yes, sir. On cross-examination witness stated that he didn't remember how long after the trial the conversation was had with Johnson, but a very short time, possibly the same evening; that it was in front of Mr. Henderson's store, and several gentlemen were present. Q. You were one of the fellows who hung the jury and prevented a verdict in this case before? A. I expect I was; yes, sir. Q. Who was present at the time (at the time Johnson made the statement)? A. Mr. Boatright was standing there. Q. Who else? A. Several others; I didn't pay any attention to them.

"F G. Boatwright, white, testified on motion for new trial that he lived at Shelby, knew T. B. Johnson, and remembered that the first trial of Charlie Jones took place in May last, and that he had heard a conversation between Mr. Johnson and Mr. Agnew [the last-named witness on motion for new trial], who was a former juror in this case. Q. State when that was, and what you heard Mr. Johnson say. A. I don't remember exactly the date; but a few days, as well as I remember it, after Mr. Agnew came along, and was talking to Mr. T. B. Johnson in front of Mr. Henderson's store, and he said, 'Well...